Brown v. JP Morgan Chase Bank NA

District Court, W.D. Washington·Decided July 2, 2020·No. 2:19-cv-01377·Unknown

Opinion

THE HONORABLE JOHN C. COUGHENOUR 1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 8 AT SEATTLE 9 RODNEY RICARDO BROWN, CASE NO. C19-1377-JCC 10 Plaintiff, ORDER 11 v. 12 JP MORGAN CHASE BANK NA 13 Defendant, 14 v. 15 MARIO A. ROBERSON, WILLIAM MICHAEL 16 BROWN, PAMELA CREMIEUX, and DOROTHY P. BROWN, 17 Third-Party Defendants. 18 19 This matter comes before the Court on Defendant JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.’s 20 (“JPMC”) status report regarding recommendations for guardian ad litem appointment (Dkt. No. 21 33). 22 In its answer to Plaintiff’s complaint, JPMC asserted an interpleader complaint and 23 impleaded third-party Defendant Dorothy P. Brown to this action.1 (Dkt. No. 6 at 6–16.) JPMC 24 25 1 The Court granted JPMC’s interpleader complaint, ordered JPMC to deposit the funds at issue 26 in this case into the court registry, and dismissed JPMC from this case. (See Dkt. Nos. 35, 39.) 1 served Ms. Brown with the complaint and a summons at her residence on September 20, 2019. 2 (Dkt. No. 18.) To date, Ms. Brown has neither appeared in this action nor answered JPMC’s 3 third-party complaint. JPMC has alleged facts that, if true, raise a serious doubt as to Ms. 4 Brown’s competency. (See Dkt. Nos. 6 at 9–14, 27 at 3–5.) JPMC has also alleged that Ms. 5 Brown is the subject of an open Adult Protective Services investigation. (Id. at 7.) Furthermore, 6 JPMC has alleged that Ms. Brown likely has an interest in the funds at issue in this action. (See 7 id.) JPMC’s concerns are corroborated by third-party Defendants Mario Roberson and Pamela 8 Cremieux. (See Dkt. Nos. 25, 30.) 9 JPMC moved for appointment of a guardian ad litem for Ms. Brown. (Dkt. No. 27.) 10 Plaintiff did not oppose the motion. The Court accordingly granted the motion and ordered the 11 parties to propose candidates to serve as guardian ad litem. (Dkt. No. 31.) JPMC conferred with 12 Ms. Cremieux and Mr. Roberson and attempted to confer with Plaintiff. (Dkt. No. 33 at 1–2.) No 13 party was able to identify a candidate to serve as guardian ad litem. (Id.) 14 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 17(c) requires the court to appoint a guardian ad litem or 15 issue other appropriate orders to protect an incompetent person who is unrepresented in an 16 action. Appointments under Rule 17(c) are normally left to the “sound discretion of the trial 17 court.” Davis v. Walker, 745 F.3d 1303, 1310 (9th Cir. 2014). Washington law provides that a 18 court may on its own motion appoint an attorney to represent an alleged incapacitated person, 19 and such counsel “shall act as an advocate for the client and shall not substitute counsel’s own 20 judgment for that of the client on the subject of what may be in the client’s best interests.” Wash. 21 Rev. Code § 11.88.045. 22 The Court previously determined that, based on uncontroverted allegations regarding Ms. 23 Brown’s lack of capacity and possible financial exploitation, Ms. Brown requires appointed 24 counsel to represent her interests in this case. (See Dkt. No. 31.) King County maintains a 25 registry of attorneys available to represent alleged incapacitated persons. Julie R. Sommer is 26 listed in the registry as an attorney qualified to represent alleged incapacitated persons. 1 Accordingly, the Court hereby ORDERS as follows: 2 1. Based on Ms. Sommer’s eligibility and qualifications as described in the King County 3 registry, the Court hereby APPOINTS Julie R. Sommer and the firm Julie R. 4 Sommer, PLLC, 701 Fifth Ave., Suite 4640 Seattle, WA 98104, to serve as counsel 5 for Dorothy P. Brown to represent Ms. Brown’s interests in this case. 6 2. Ms. Sommer shall be paid at a reasonable rate from the funds at issue previously 7 deposited in the court registry. 8 3. Ms. Sommer shall not employ or retain counsel or experts to assist in these duties 9 except as authorized in advance by the Court. 10 4. The Clerk is DIRECTED to send a copy of this order to Julie R. Sommer at 11 jsommer@jsommerlaw.com. 12 DATED this 2nd day of July 2020. A 13 14 15 John C. Coughenour 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Brown v. JP Morgan Chase Bank NA, (W.D. Wash. 2020).

Brown v. JP Morgan Chase Bank NA (Brown v. JP Morgan Chase Bank NA) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Kennard Davis v. James Walker
745 F.3d 1303 (Ninth Circuit, 2014)